United States 116th Congress Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

S 2082 — STRONGER Patents Act of 2019

Last action — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed House
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 116th Congress. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there are no live odds of enactment. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Support Technology and Research for Our Nation's Growth and Economic Resilience Patents Act of 2019 or the STRONGER Patents Act of 2019 This bill makes several patent-related changes, including with respect to how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) conducts administrative patent validity reviews. When deciding inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs), the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) shall give patent claim terms their ordinary and customary meanings as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art (the same standard used in court). If a court has already construed a patent claim, the USPTO shall consider that construction. The bill makes various changes relating to such proceedings, such as by (1) raising the burden of proof to invalidate a patent claim; (2) establishing that a challenged patent claim is presumed valid; (3) imposing standing requirements as to who may file an IPR or PGR, where none currently exist except for some timing requirements; (4) restricting when multiple challenges may be filed against the same patent; and (5) limiting IPRs and PGRs when a court or the International Trade Commission has ruled on the obviousness or novelty of the same patent claims. This bill also (1) makes it easier to get an injunction after a court finding of the infringement of a valid patent, by a presumption that further infringement would cause irreparable injury and the remedies available at law are inadequate; (2) authorizes the USPTO to keep and spend the fees that it collects; and (3) makes bad faith patent demand letters an unfair or deceptive act in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Introduced in Senate

  2. Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 546 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (546)

546 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 546 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Subjects

technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does S 2082 do?
Support Technology and Research for Our Nation's Growth and Economic Resilience Patents Act of 2019 or the STRONGER Patents Act of 2019 This bill makes several patent-related changes, including with respect to how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) conducts administrative patent validity reviews. When deciding inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs), the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) shall give patent claim terms their ordinary and customary meanings as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art (the same standard used in court). If a court has already construed a patent claim, the USPTO shall consider that construction. The bill makes various changes relating to such proceedings, such as by (1) raising the burden of proof to invalidate a patent claim; (2) establishing that a challenged patent claim is presumed valid; (3) imposing standing requirements as to who may file an IPR or PGR, where none currently exist except for some timing requirements; (4) restricting when multiple challenges may be filed against the same patent; and (5) limiting IPRs and PGRs when a court or the International Trade Commission has ruled on the obviousness or novelty of the same patent claims. This bill also (1) makes it easier to get an injunction after a court finding of the infringement of a valid patent, by a presumption that further infringement would cause irreparable injury and the remedies available at law are inadequate; (2) authorizes the USPTO to keep and spend the fees that it collects; and (3) makes bad faith patent demand letters an unfair or deceptive act in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
Who sponsors S 2082?
S 2082 is sponsored by Coons, Christopher A. (Democratic).
What is the current status of S 2082?
This bill died with 116th Congress. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track S 2082?
Track S 2082 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on S 2082

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of S 2082

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →